Hello,
for quite a while, I was actually wondering why this isn't already so, but maybe there is a good reason that I didn't consider.

In every game, when you reach the maximum amount of players allowed, for example 10 in Uno, and another player joins, you can't start the game at all. The Playroom will tell you that this game can be played with 10 players.
However, why not just start the game anyway? Take the 10 players that came first, and put the rest as spectators. It's certainly better than asking people to leave or to become spectators.
I would still give the warning that the game can be played with 10 players only, but not refuse to start completely.

What do you think/is there something obvious I didn't consider?

Well I actually wonder the same. So I agree on taking the first players that joined the table instead of making us totally unable to start, especially since the social score was introduced and we don't want to kick people at random.

I think the system as it is is fine. If you take the Uno example with a limit of 10 players you suggested and the 10th player is an uninvited player and the 11th player was your "best friend" would you carry on the game if you notice they were not part of it? Maybe that player was "best friends with another "major player/players" some may leave if their friend was not included... We know if people see games with more people in they are more likely to join and personally I would rather control my own destination with these situations.

You have had this issue with tournaments and have had to ask people to switch their spectator mode on/off depending on their situation and your suggestion would not change that issue.

Just out of interest I have had a 5th player join scopa while I was starting and they just about managed to get in to a 4 player game. Not teams with 5 though if my memory is correct as that was a long time ago.

Good suggest, up up

I aggree with Ynwa. In addition, the kick function is there, as a last resort. Idk, its a minor thing, easily resolved by talking but interesting topic. This is just my view.

A selectable list where master can choose who to include can be best of both worlds

The list can work but it could cause some issues for a few who accidently choose the wrong players. The odd one may not realise they have left their friend out especially in Uno where you focus on your own game...

With the system we have now players would be kicked out or asked to put on their spectator mode. Under the new system players may find out they are not playing when everybody else is playing and they can't because they have no cards.

Hello,

I'm not sure what would be the best thing to do, and I'm not sure that your propositions would help well for situations like tournaments.

The advantage of the current behavior is that it's crystal clear: you have no risk to accidentally forget someone or include someone in error.
As a game master, the simplest and safest to do is to open the table, make it hidden, invite the players you want to play with, start the game, and only then make the table visible again. In this way, those who join the table will necessarily be spectators.

The difficulty with a list of players to include in the game is that it has to be updated live. It's going to produce a lot of bugs of the kind including someone, and then by the time you confirm the list, that player left.
What to do with that ? Take another player at his/her place at random, or take the next one in join order ? Just starting the game without that player isn't possible as easily in all games, think about games like jass, spades or belote where the game is maybe completely impossible, or at least totally different when you are playing with two teams of two or everyone for him/herself.
There are already bugs related to that kind of behavior and it happens all the time, this is the nature of all online games, so I don't think it's judicious to complexify the thing. And at the end, it won't prevent you from selecting the wrong people.

Without a list of players to include in the game, it's going to stay unclear. If we take the 10 first to join the table, there is still great chances to include someone you didn't want, or to forget somone you wanted, simply because he/she joined too early or too late.
Really, again, the best thing to do as a table master is to make the table visible only after the game has started.

However, maybe we can talk about turning on spectator mode automatically in some situations.
For example, if you join a table with a game already in progress, it could be the case, so to avoid being accidentally included if the game has to be restarted. But it isn't so simple, since you can then have your spectator mode turned on without notice.

I think It can be set by table mastrs. For example I want to play 1000 miles with 30 bots, realy.

That makes no sense. In most games, there is a limit for a good reason.
In your 1000 miles example, the default deck contains 106 cards, and every player gets 6. 6*30=180, so as you can see, there is even not enough cards in the deck for something like that.

There is also another very good reason why this isn't possible. As Poker quite nicely tells you, with more players, you'd fall asleep waiting for your turn...

Hello,

10-12 players is already more than what most of usual games say in their paper rules. The playroom is generally more flexible than it could be. In fact, the best experience is often reached with 4 players and many games have been designed primarily for 4.